The Diverse Values and Motivations of Family Forest Owners in the United States: An Analysis of an Open-ended Question in the National Woodland Owner Survey

Abstract

The number of family forest owners in the USA has increased continuously in recent decades, and the fate of much of US forests lies in the hands of this diverse and dynamic group of people. The National Woodland Owner Survey (NWOS) is a recurring and comprehensive national survey of US private forest owners, including family forest owners. The NWOS includes an open-ended question that explores forest owners' motivations and values related to their woodland. The open-ended question format allows respondents to express their own frame of reference in their own words, rather than respond to predetermined, fixedresponse categories of motivations. This paper describes the system of values and motivations that emerged from analysis of responses to the open-ended question, and compares these findings to a closed-ended, fixed-response question also included in the NWOS. Diverse and multidimensional motives were expressed by respondents. Eight broad categories and 37 sub-categories of motives and values emerged from analysis of the open-ended question. The fixed categories of the closed-ended question failed to capture many dimensions of forest owner motivations. A more detailed, qualitative understanding of forest owner motivations and values is needed to provide extension foresters and others who work with family forest owners important insights and help guide public policy related to private forestland. Open-ended survey questions can help provide such understanding.

Forest owner is more than her goal: a qualitative typology of Lithuanian owners

“…They allow explaining phenomena that are difficult to measure and model quantitatively. Hugosson and Ingemarson (2004) and Bengston et al (2011) contend that qualitative methods enable very specific and individual insights into respondents' reasoning that would be impossible using traditional surveys. Also fruitful combinations of quantitative and qualitative approaches are possible.…”

“…Hugosson and Ingemarson (2004) consider (Kurtz & Lewis 1981;Blis & Martin 1989) A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 6 (Lönnstedt & Törnqvist 1990;Lönnstedt 1997) in Sweden to be amongst the most important qualitative studies during 1980s and 1990s. Since then the applications have been on rise, not least in Scandinavia (Hujala et al 2007;Hujala & Tikkanen 2008;Hokajärvi et al 2009;Hujala et al 2009;Urquhart et al 2010;Bengston et al 2011;Lähdesmäki & Matilainen 2014). These studies applied qualitative methods to depict PFO goals, motivations, problems, and practices of forest management.…”

Taxonomic Review of Classical and Current Literature on the Perennial American Family Forest Problem

“…Not surprisingly, asset or financial position (or a proxy for asset position, like size of forest holding) often was found to be an important determinant of landowner behavior [13,42]. Plus, a number of studies showed that many NIPF owners did not primarily focus on timber production, but had major ownership objectives related to non-timber outputs like wildlife and recreation [51,92,104,105,112,134,[145][146][147][148][149][150][151][152][153][154][155][156][157][158][159]. Even forest landowners' stated intentions were found to differ from later forest management practices on the ground [152][153][154][155].…”

Using an OBCD Approach and Landsat TM Data to Detect Harvesting on Nonindustrial Private Property in Upper Michigan

“…As the NWOS has developed, several questions have prompted forest owners to predict how likely they are to perform certain management activities, including harvesting (and harvest intensity), along with other values and motivations for forest ownership [54]. Using this methodology, the number of owners reporting the intent to harvest in the next 5-10 years could be checked against the number of harvests (and their intensity) that actually occurred during that time in that survey area, providing an estimate of how closely landowner intentions match reality.…”